Local

HARTFORD — One state lawmaker wants to allow teachers and school principals to carry concealed firearms in the wake of the Newtown school shooting.

With some exemptions, state law currently prohibits firearms and dangerous weapons on school grounds. The law also covers school events.

Rep. Robert C. Sampson, R-Wolcott, said he is sponsoring legislation to carve out an exemption for teachers and school administrators.

"I just think that people that are in the workplace, they ought to be able to defend themselves," he said.

A lone gunman shot his way into the Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14 and killed 20 first-graders and six staff members there.

Now, legislators and the Malloy administration are working on responses to the tragedy.

Sampson believes that allowing teachers and school administrators to carry concealed guns could prevent a repeat of the Newtown tragedy.

His legislation has not been formally introduced in the House yet. However, that could happen as early as today.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy dismissed the idea of arming school staff or stationing armed guards at schools in his opening day address to the legislature on Wednesday. Lawmakers will be meeting through June 5.

The prospects for Republican-sponsored legislation are generally dim in the Democratic-controlled legislature and can get even dimmer for controversial ideas, particularly ones that the Democratic governor opposes.

The horrific crime in Newtown has led to calls to tighten the state's already-strict gun laws. It is also prompting reactions from opponents of more gun control.

Sampson said his bill will only give properly trained teachers and administrators the option to carry a concealed firearm on the job. He said it would not extend to other individuals.

The current prohibition against carrying firearms on school grounds is 14 years old. A 1998 change in the law removed an exemption for anyone who held a valid state or local permit to carry a firearm.

The legislature should revisit that decision after the Sandy Hook tragedy, said Scott Wilson, president of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League. He said gun-free zones invite crime and violence.

The head of the state's largest teachers' union, the Connecticut Education Association, praised Malloy's tough stand on keeping guns out of schools.

"We can't treat our schools like prisons with armed guards on patrol, but we must take action to stop more tragedies like the one in Newtown from occurring," said CEA President Sheila Cohen.

Should school staff be allowed to carry weapons? Visit rep-am.com to comment on this story.

Follow Us

Brian Evelich wrote on Jan 11, 2013 12:58 AM:

" A trained calm thinking and armed person is most often the sole successful way to stop a irrational and convinced perpetrator of evil intentions. Take the time, solicit volunteers, train them in decision making and state statutes on the use of lethal force for the protection of persons. Most effectively, make it known publicaly that staff are trained countermeasures and armed to defend the children. There are more "home protected by an alarm" signs then alarm systems, because public alert is a gat deterrent. I support yourproposal Rob. "

" This is a horrible idea. Giving untrained teachers and principals weapons so that they can engage attackers in shootouts old West style in hallways full of children is not the answer. Now teachers, in addition to their work with students, are expected to be armed security guards? If you want weapons on school grounds, which I do not agree with either, at least hire trained experts in their use. This proposal would increase the risk of school shootings, not prevent them. Teachers are forced to break up fights at schools all the time, sometimes putting themselves in harms way (in the middle of the fight) to do so. What if that teacher is carrying a weapon, and one of the enraged students (who is fighting anyway) gets a hold of that weapon, and shoots his or her opponent?

" Could they also use: an armed guard, dogs, special doors, cameras???? And take away that Gun Free Zone sign...nothing like advertising you are so vulnerable. Our lawmakers sure prove the "Peter Princple" is in full swing. "

" Hey Dannel-boy, I found your replacement. Mr. Sampson has the right answer to protect our children. Why don't you open your stupid brain and LISTEN for once.You apparently have no idea what evil is lurking out there in this world. Long term "fixes" will take decades, if ever, to prevent such tragedies. If the public is really smart, short term stuff like "VOLUNTARY" armed guards and armed school personnel (if they to choose to) carry guns. Teachers should not have to carry a gun, but the principal, vice-prin, secretary, custodian, etc. all possibly the first people to confront a gunman. Teachers are concentrating on teaching children in a closed class room.. not the first line of defense. "

" on arming the teachers: this has to be one of the worst ideas, why not arm the students?? there are too many con`s and not any pro`s to this idea. the last thing a school needs are teachers being part of a police force.. this will take years of diccusion and i hope legislators will see fit to vote this down. "

" Just one gun in that hands of an administrator or staff at the Newtown school would have completely changed the outcome. Anyone believing that gun control will stop a mad-man from committing such a heinous act is deluding themselves. "

" For those who do not think having a police officer /retired officer in schools is a good idea, I have a question maybe I can be enlightened. In every school in America we have fire alarms, fire extinguishers, fire hoses, sprinklers, smoke detectors, practice fire drills and practice fire safety. If I was to say we are taking all of those things out of the schools what would everyone say? I don't have all the answers but the state requires that police officers are trained in "active shooter response" and I would at least want my children to have a chance rather than be at the mercy of a madman or someone's "politicaly correct" crusade. If the police were notified that Lanza's mother did not secure her firearms and her son had access to them there are laws in which they could have been taken and we would not be having this conversation. "

" i heard a gentleman today, a retired teacher who was substituting in Sandy Hook on on that day. he described sitting in lockdown for two hours and trying to figure out how he would defend the 26 kids and one adult in the room with him. he said he would have liked a gun. "

" @blue star....actually, I wouldn't do it for any price. I'm not interested in teaching with a gun on my hip....even for a significant pay raise. And before you insult and/or put down teachers, try to remember what those Sandy Hook teachers did that day. They died protecting their students. "

" Good for you Wtby teacher! I feel the same way! It is preposterous that anyone in the public thinks that we teachers should become cowboys! Should every secretary, receptionist, dental hygenist, grocery store cashier, waitress, hairdresser, pedicurist, shoe saleswoman, minister, yoga instructor, ski patroller, etc. etc. start being required to carry pistols to protect themselves and fellow employees in their jobs??? Redonkulous!!! That is what security officers and the police are for!! The more guns, the more likely there are to be unnecessary and accidental shootings by panicky people.... "

" No thanks from here too. To al.cap it take would take me less than 30 seconds to put my class in lockdown. We have practiced many times and my classroom door is always in the locked position. It would take me far longer to first put my kids in their lockdown position ( they are 5 year olds and I wouldn't want them anywhere near my gun after all) , go to whatever hopefully secure place the gun is stored (have you ever been in some of these classrooms? You need to have the pencil sharpener guarded so the points arent too sharp lest some student try to attack- Im serious), and then get ready to go shoot someone. Nope- I've spent my entire life teaching kids and promoting kindness and peace. Toting a gun goes against every fiber in my being and would probably do way more harm in my nervousness. No thanks - Ill exercise my right NOT to carry a gun. If rather leave the profession. "

" And with that gun should come a significant pay raise for the added responsibility."

@Teacher, I believe those are your words. As for myself Iwould not dream of giving most teachers a firearm.

What those courageous and selfless individuals did that day has no bearing on my opinion of educators on the whole. They are to honored. I don't know you well enough to form an opinion, only what you posted above.

" And with that gun should come a significant pay raise for the added responsibility."

" @blue starI don't know you either but you must be a great asset to your employer. It sounds like you're willing to take on a significant amount of more responsibility without being compensated for it! Your boss should completely take advantage of that! "

" And blue star, just so you know, I would quit my job if I was going to be required to wear a gun. Same as "Another teacher" and many of my colleagues! Seriously, arming all 100+ teachers in a school building, with hundreds of students around just isn't a wise idea! "

" Teachers dont have to walk around with guns on their hips,why do people instantly paint that picture?but there should at least be a gun locked up somewhere perhaps the office where in a emergency it can be used ,which most likely it never will be needed.why is that so hard to imagine ? I guess you can just charge a murderous gunman and say YOU CANT DO THAT HERE.good luck. "

" @another teacher- i've never said, nor would i say, that all teachers should be required to carry or, in any other way, arm themselves, if they aren't comfortable in doing so. all i've ever said is, if a teacher wishes to, and gets the proper license and training, they should be allowed to carry, or otherwise have access to, a self defense weapon. i never even said they should act as a guard or security officer, only that they should be allowed to defend their own life, should it become necessary.

my wife works alone in our store sometimes. she is armed and trained. does that mean we want her to shoot someone? no. but, she could defend herself if necessary. "

" Let's see. Police officers (already in schools) have about 3 months of training to carry. Teachers have a minimum of 4 years teacher training. An officer costs maybe about $40 to $50,000.00. Teachers that would like the training and a $5,000 to $10,000 stipend is more logical than what I'm reading! Apparently teachers in other states can't wait to take up concealed carry! Quite a few out there now are wandering if they choose the right profession especially when they can't protect themselves due to those few that are making so much noise! It's already been proven that concealed carry cuts down on violent crime! "

" Nobody is asking teachers to be cops, or to ever let on who is or is not carrying a weapon. If Waterbury teacher wants to leave his or her job they should certainly be allowed to do so. But there will be a minority of LOVING teachers who will be willing to shoulder the burden, which WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY AMOUNT TO NO MORE THAN CARRYING 1.5 extra lbs. somewhere on their person, just in case but primarily as a deterrent and as a last ditch effort. Stupid people talk of shootouts, as if it were somehow more wise to lay down and let dozens of children simply be executed. In fact there would be less than a 1/100,000 chance the firearm would ever see daylight in a teachers entire carreer. A lack of love and lack of manly virtue seems to attend all our social ills. The great American chickens foot, I really wish the U.S would surrender to Texas so we can all be proud of ourselves again. "

" Ladies, Gents.Teachers with guns and classrooms with locked up hidden guns is wrong. They have the ultimate responsibility to protect children and keeping them calm.What Mr. Sampson should propose is that school admistrators have guns. Their focus would be on who enters the school. With instant communications with other administrative personnel that have concealed carry permits, these administrative people have a better chance of stopping someone with a gun. With training, at least one princpal, assistant, custodian, etc.could stop the threat. And, these people know the layout of the school better than anyone. "

" Principals, teachers, secretaries carrying guns is by far the most rediculous idea I have ever heard. How long before the crazy kids figure out who has the guns. How long before they become enraged at something and jump or attack that person and get the gun. Oh that won't happen! Spend 3minutes in a high school before making all these assinine proposals. I would feel less safe with guns in the schools, then I do now. "

" It's smarter and probably more cost effective to hire a retired local police officer. Teachers don't need the responsibility of protecting kids. Retired police have the experience of defusing volatile situations either thru intimidation, force, or deadly force and the years of training and legal education to do it safely and legally. We don't want 21 year old 90 lb Ms Neverbeeninafight having to make a split second decision with a gun, do we? "

" If I were a teacher, custodian, aide, etc in any school I would be carrying already. And the thing is, NO ONE would ever know until, god forbid, the need for me to utilize the ONLY tool that is effective against a animal that wants to murder children would be used. The thought that a teacher has to walk around with some monster weapon on their hip is ridiculous, stop believing Hollywood. I and my wife carry (small, concealable legally registered, pistols, we also both have our CCW permits) EVERY DAY, EVERY WHERE we go and no one is the wiser. We hope to never have to use our firearms in self defense or the defense of others, but we are ready, well trained and willing to protect any of you in this forum without hesitation. Thanks for reading. "

" @ Larry, our High Schools have full time police officers in them now. They are there to protect students and TEACHERS from violent teenage students. What makes you think there are teachers in every school with the training, ability, and desire to become a part time cop? Do we send them for police academy training? God forbid they shoot someone by accident or unlawfully. Where do they store the gun after school? Do we pay them extra to carry the gun? Extra pay might temp a teacher with no intention to use it to apply, giving us a false sense of security. They went to school to be teachers, not soldiers. It is about as sensible as putting a sign on the school entrance stating no guns allowed as a deterrent. "

" John Q agreed. This grandmother is within reach of a firearm 24/7. Unless you know me, you would NEVER know it. A security office with cameras placed around the school and a police officer to monitor them is the best answer. Period "

" Did the teachers die protecting/defending the students? Really? Other than hearing the Principal ran towards the front doors, (was she going to investigate or to confront him) I haven't heard of any teachers going after the shooter. Did any of them die attacking him with a chair, or other improvised weapon? Did any try to create a diversion by running down the hall.? All I've heard was they hid with them and prayed until killed. I'm not trying to disrespect what they did. I'm sure they did their best. My point is a police officer would have responded differently, armed or not, they would FIGHT. "

" So when the kids decide to jump the principal or teacher in the stairwell to try and get the gun, what should they do...shoot them. Don't think for one second teachers and principals are not threatened and assulted already. "

" This representative is exactly what we need more of in our state legislature. Why? Because a proposal like this, had it been in place before the shooting, would absolutely, undeniably minimized casualties that day. It may not have prevented it altogether, but even if it prevents one death, I am all for it. This guy understands what common-sense really is.

And one more thing, for all of these people who say, 'Teachers are teachers and their job is hard enough. We can't ask them to do the job of a cop and a teacher. That is insane!' No one is making carry mandatory. But allowing carry in places that it is currently disallowed will certainly allow teachers who wish to protect themselves and their students to do so. It is understood that some teachers don't like guns, don't want to think about guns, are anti-gun, etc. However, if it means allowing just one teacher, janitor, administrator, cafeteria person who wishes to carry at work that right, I am all for it.

My last point. In a time where our economy is still a little green around the gills and our economic future is all but sure, everybody is pinching pennies and cutting back (or at least they should be). A resolution such as arming teachers is legislation that costs no money at all. It is a simple statute that would amend existing laws. No training is required because of the stringent training requirements the state already imposes on pistol permit holders. Those teachers that do carry at school could identify themselves to school administrators and law enforcement, and become a suitable replacement for now common-place School Resource Officers. They would still teach and do their job, just would not need a SRO anymore, ultimately cutting back on overtime and saving the tax payers a buck or two. If their is any cost implication, it would be a net savings for at least the municipalities, if not the state who in recent years has been giving grant money to towns to pay the salaries of public officials. And by having someone (maybe more than one teacher, perhaps multiple teacher will exercise their right) there with a concealed firearm, it becomes the great equalizer. A good guy with a gun to match the bad guy with the gun.

Let me be clear though. Banning, confiscating, or what not, will do one thing, remove the guns from the good guys, who will comply with the bans and confiscation. That means one thing to me. Open season for the bad guy. "

" Al for the same reason you and I are not allowed to bring our guns into Government buildings maybe? I have no problem with a teacher with a ccp. I just think it's better to rely on a police officer to do the job. Do you think a teacher in the middle of a class on the 3rd floor is a better security guard than a police officer sitting in a security office watching cameras? Cross training isn't as good as specialized personnel. Retired cops with 20+ years experience are better than a 20 yr old teacher. They're already in our high schools. Since when is seeing a police officer such a horrifying site?? Teachers with guns is such a knee jerk reaction. "

You make the mistake of thinking that anyone with a gun and without a badge couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a peashooter. Furthermore, that everyone with a gun and a badge is America's Top Shot. Also, we're not arming teachers, we want to allow teachers to be armed if they wish. And you find fault with that? "

" What i find fault with is using that as the answer solution. Have you really given it thought? Would they attempt to conceal it on them? Tough to hide a gun unless you're wearing a jacket. For the most part, teachers aren't brawlers. If they were, they wouldn't have gone into teaching. Most teachers are women. Being a woman, I'd be comfortable with me having the gun, but I've been shooting and fighting for over 30 years. So if one school doesn't have a teacher "willing" to cross train as a police officer, you do what?

You tell me what you have against a police officer in a security office watching surveillance cameras? Is it the money? Do we arm bank tellers or hire security? Do we give prosecutors guns? or hire sheriffs? The security profession is serious stuff. It's not part time, it's not for the faint of heart, and it gets ugly quickly. I don't want to dishonor those teachers, but if they were police officers, more than praying until they were killed would have happened. "

" You have a very good point. Teachers are not cops. However, if you do have a teacher who is willing to carry while at school; why prohibit them? It definitely is not the end-all solution whatsoever, but it definitely is a step in a right direction.

Interesting thought about arming bank tellers, if they were armed, would you rob that bank? Probably not, and while criminals are bad people that doesn't make them stupid all the time. Criminals have a tendency to follow a logical process. If they know they face an armed opposition, they'll take their criminal business to an unarmed bank. This is why shoplifters steal from retailers they know won't prosecute them. This is why predators go after women who are by themselves. This is why gun stores almost never get held upand police stations don't get burglarized.

To answer your questions.

If there is no one willing to step up hire an armed security officer to protect the grounds. Police are a costly alternative, but both can defuse an active shooter with appropriate training (There are professional well-trained outfits that do exist, I am not talking Securitas or those mall guard types.) Hell, ask for volunteers. I'd volunteer some time to keep a watch over my kid's school. If enough parents did it, you could save enough money, and at the local level, this could reduce overall cost. I have nothing against a police officer sitting in a security office watching cameras. It's going to cost you a hell of a lot more money than hiring a private security firm or getting a few law-abiding parents to do the same. "

" George, You don't want Joe Schmo in your kids school prowling the halls looking to shoot someone. Vigilantes aren't the answer, not even a step in the right direction. Forget the idea of volunteer cops. I'm not even going to address the legality of it.

After the initial surveillance equipment is installed, there isn't much cost. It can be manned by retired police (dont forget, alot of them retire in their 40's). They don't need insurance or benefit packages. You can get them for $200-300/day. That's practically free. We spend hundreds of millions/yr to keep the schools open. A few thousand/yr for a police presence is peanuts. "

First off, I didn't say Joe Schmo. That implies some average layman with no training. What I proposed were average armed citizens who volunteer to be trained to a degree of proficiency in dealing with these problems. I have no problem recruiting these people from retired police officers, current and former military, armed security officers and even regular citizens who are happy to exercise their 2nd Amendment. You could even have a board of citizens vet them if you wish. But to have police officers at every school is not the cost-effective approach here. There are plenty of people in this world who have never worn a badge in their life that are equally or better qualified to do the job.

Volunteer cops are a different animal. You are basically giving someone police powers without paying them for their duty. In theory, someone who wishes to volunteer their time to perform said duties, is very cost-effective. Additionally, this state used to have auxiliary police at one time, which is essentially the same thing. Off the top of my head, I am not sure why they don't do it anymore. I believe it had something to do with the police unions finding fault with the fact that unpaid volunteers were taking work away from them. Not sure if there is a law that prohibits the existence of such an individual, although I do not believe there is. In my opinion, I don't think the issue is as much of legality as it is a gripe with the unions. Irregardless, there must be a standard of training. The last thing I am advocating, sworn or unsworn, is Joe Snuffy toting around the halls of a school with a firearm and no training. That is a NO GO in my book.

I think having surveillance equipment in place is a good idea with a caveat. Once it is installed will it just be used to look for an active shooter, or will they start using it for other things like making sure students are getting to class on time or chasing down kids without hall passes. Slippery slope here. Again, a good idea, but the right principles must be behind it.

I have nothing against law enforcement. There is definitely a place for them in community. However, a lot of people put them on a pedestal (regarding training and experience) above all other regular citizens. There are, again, an immense amount of citizens who can be specifically trained to a degree that would make them equally proficient in such a situation. Additionally, law enforcement has really gotten away from their direct charge to protect and serve. Now they operate more as extended arms of the government to collect revenue. Instead of actively searching for actual criminals, protecting and serving the public, they are looking for the next great spot to hide and nail you for speeding or conspiring the next place a whole bunch of them are going to set up shop to see if you are wearing your seat belt. That is not law enforcement, nor is it protecting or serving. That is revenue collection. Now before I get the backlash from someone on the job, I understand that stopping cars for probable cause to see if something bigger is going on is something that is commonplace. Minor traffic infractions are used to get a closer look at the car. However, to stop a car merely to issue a ticket and collect revenue for the state, is not law enforcement. If police spent less time with these trivial activities it would free them up to protect those things we cherish most. You wouldn't have to hire an extra cop, you could use an existing one, which is a zero-cost increase from the status quo, and I would be OK with that. "

" Well, I am all about going to Hartford, but I wouldn't spit on the guy. As much as I disagree with him, he still is the Governor. I still respect his office. I would definitely be all about talking to the legislators and even giving testimony before the house or senate. "

i'm working on the 19th, but i'll be in hartford on the 8th. hope to see you guys there. and join connecticut citizens defense league. they have some great stuff going on. and they'll keep you informed on hearing dates and such. "

" George, My young friend. Ever hear "you get what you pay for"? Volunteers are free. Volunteer cops were done away with because they didn't work out well. Cops like firefighters are constantly honing their skills plus police officers have to keep up on the ever changing law. Let me put some rough numbers together for you. The high schools already have full time regular police assigned to them so no cost there. How many middle and grammar schools do we have? 24. school days 180. If we generously paid retired or off duty police $25/hr (most retired cops work for alot less). Thats $36,000/yr. Look at it as adding 1/2 of a teacher to each school, or 1/3 of an assistant principal. It's PEANUTS. They don't need benefits as they already have them. $800,000/yr total. Mayor OLeary throws $800,000 at the Education Department to throw birthday parties for Principals. We spent $100,000,000 on new schools last year. A police officer in every school would cost less than 1% of what we spent just on new schools this year. For every assistant to the assistant principal we fire, we can hire 3 police officers. Getting the point?

Police are in a different league that the average guy, it's just a fact. Its like comparing volunteer firemen to our professional firefighters. Would you go to a volunteer surgeon? Would you fly in a plane that my cousin Guido fixed? Im not saying you couldnt get to the same point as a police officer, but it take constant training and experience. You can't do that in your spare time. "

" George, if you go, leave your watch home. Those snake oil salesmen will steal it right off your wrist. Talk to them? ha Don't you know they know what's better for you than you do? Silly young man.We've elected geniuses. They don't care what you say. They are going to do what they need to do to keep them in the good graces of the Chris Murphys of the world. "

If the standard of training is the same, the volunteer or paid is indifferent.

If anything, my opinion is that volunteers are better (assuming equal training standard). Volunteers do something for no cost because they have a true passion for what they do. Paid individuals do what they do because it puts food on the table. If they feel they aren't being compensated fairly or there are other issues within the department, people tend to begrudge the job instead of embracing it. They begin to work out of necessity than out of desire.

Finally, if you think that an ordinary citizen who is permitted to carry a firearm isn't honing his skills like the next guy, you're very wrong. I find that most owners like myself tend to take every opportunity possible to get more knowledge, information and hands-on experience possible. I am constantly taking firearms courses, tactical courses, my job provides me with training for various scenarios, etc.

Perhaps if I clarify.

A volunteer, who pays his own way to train to that standard, would be equally as effective and less costly to the public, than hiring a police officer to babysit a school. Develop and define that standard, then ask for a show of hands. I believe you would be very surprised at the resulting arms in the air.

If you cousin Guido was someone I trusted to do the job right, and I knew he was passionate about working on my plane, I would probably feel safer than flying commercial. "

" George, your age is showing. There is a huge difference in volunteer and professional. Police and fire especially. I worked closely with both of these professions. There just isnt enough time in the day to do your job, have a life, then train and practice in the police field after. Same with fire. Vol firemen are yahoos. Guys looking for a little weekend excitement. They respond to MAYBE 1 call a week. Same with the police. Police officers go from one call to the next. How are you going to get that experience as a private citizen? You can't. There is just no comparison. I don't want a weekend warrior in the school with a gun. Volunteer firemen create their own emergencies all the time for excitement. Every year we read about them lighting fires so they can play hero. It's just not good, plud I doubt that there are enough "qualified" regular Joes who would volunteer to do it. Lets not give up security for a few measly dollars. $800,000 a year to put a REAL police officer in every school is peanuts. It's time for the rubber to hit the road. To walk the walk not just talk the talk. "

" George K,Maybe I'll spit on the sidewalk...with a cartoon image of Malloy on it. Sorry, Geo-K, I can't respect stupidity...The arguement of who, how, and why armed guards must be in schools needs no answer. JUST DO IT!! NOW !!As time goes on, the plan would be modified and improved to accomodate every school everyday.But of course, if obama confiscates our guns, all bets are off. "

Post a reader comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog. Please be civil and respectful.If you're witty, to the point and quotable, your reader comments may also be included on the Around the Towns page of The Sunday Republican. Readers must be registered and logged in to post comments on the site. Registration is free. Click Here to register.
A Subscription is not required to post comments only a Registration.